Many computing services (e.g., email, document storage, social networking, online banking, company network access, blogging services, etc.) utilize authentication mechanisms for security. Online identity providers may provide authentication schemes consumed by computing services and users with diverse security needs. Unfortunately, users may not have the ability to configure the type of authentication mechanisms within an authentication scheme that is used to access these computing resources. For example, a social networking service may provide users with an authentication scheme comprising a username and password along with a challenge-response question. If, for example, an online identity provider has a set authentication scheme for the social networking service, then a user may not have the ability to customize the authentication scheme, such as adding and/or removing the authentication mechanisms (e.g., adding a device ID) used within the authentication scheme, which may provide a less satisfactory user experience, which may be exacerbated based upon the type of provider. That is, substantial disparity may exist between different types of providers regarding how authentication is accomplished. For example, a large scale online identification service provider may provide identity services that are consumed by services and consumers with diverse security needs, whereas a bank, for example, may have relatively fixed security requirements and a more homogeneous user base. Accordingly, a relatively static, inflexible authentication scheme may prove less than satisfactory given the diversity of authentication needs and/or applications.